Baseline for skill system

So I was posting in the Lockpick thread and I think I've come up with a way to articulate our skill system, whether that skill be Streetwise (bribing a guard or intimidating a thieves' guild tough) or Armorer (crafting an ebony blade or banging the dents out of armor)

Roll d%. A roll below (skill + tool + modifiers) - (difficulty + modifiers) is a success.

So if we're trying to bribe a guard to let us in to see the Fighter's Guildmaster and the Guildmaster has ordered nobody to disturb him:
(Streetwise (75) + 500 gold (50)) - (Guard's willpower (50) + Orders from the Guildmaster (45))
125 - 95
30% chance of getting the guard to let you in.
If you were a regular at the Guild, you might get a conditional bonus based on Reputation or Favor Points (if we institute the Favor system).

We could use the same thing for combat, even.
Long Blade (50) + Glass (25) + Balanced (10) - Chitin Armor (25) + Agility bonus (6) + Chitin Shield (15)
85 - 46
39% chance to connect with your sword.

I'm using random numbers here, but the principle will remain the same for pretty much any skills. It's not super-revolutionary, but it's like the WoD system. If we can get in writing the core mechanic that drives our system, everything else will be a lot easier to work with.

Sounds pretty solid to me, I don't see any real flaws. Although I do notice that with the guard in the first example, disposition isn't effecting it at all, which it should probably. Not to complicate things more than they have to be of course.

I suppose for the more intangible things, we'd have to leave the numbers up to the GM to decide to just how high the score should be? It would be hard to quantify every possible action such as "orders from the guild leader" beforehand.

We couldn't give a listed bonus or penalty for every possible situation, but we could provide a basic guidline for similar situations across the spectrum.

For example, a +10 bonus would be for telling a lie the fellow wants to believe
+0 for a believable lie
-10 for a hard-to-swallow lie
-20 for an outrageous lie
-40 for an impossible lie.

Admin wrote:We couldn't give a listed bonus or penalty for every possible situation, but we could provide a basic guidline for similar situations across the spectrum.

For example, a +10 bonus would be for telling a lie the fellow wants to believe
+0 for a believable lie
-10 for a hard-to-swallow lie
-20 for an outrageous lie
-40 for an impossible lie.

This system tempts me horribly. It makes it so that when we have to finally test the system, I wat to play an imperial with personality as a favored stat and the lady birthsign for extra personality and etiquitte, mercantile, Streetwise and Illusion (for charm spells) as major skills. Then I'd do my best to get things like the mask of clavicus vile for even MORE personality and hit the Telvanni bugmusk as much as I can. That way, I could do nothing but tell the most balls-to-the-wall-impossible lies ALL THE TIME.

Sorry, I couldn't keep it in.

P.S. It is a good system of guidelines though, btw.

Saint Jiub wrote:We could use the same thing for combat, even.
Long Blade (50) + Glass (25) + Balanced (10) - Chitin Armor (25) + Agility bonus (6) + Chitin Shield (15)
85 - 46
39% chance to connect with your sword.

I like the basic core mechanic we have worked out, as it can apply to, well, anything, which is good. But the combat system in my opinion needs a bit of work.

The first problem I see is Agility bonus (6). If I'm correct in assuming that comes from an agility stat of 60, then the bonus is almost completely insubstantial in comparison with how high the ability is.

Secondly, I don't like the way armor/unarmored skills are handled. They don't seem to have any reward except for every 25 points in them, which is against the spirit of the game in my opinion. Every skill point you got meant something. I recommend that the armor themselves be the multiplier, and the fixed value be the armor skill.

And lastly, while this isn't a problem per se, when I suggested the battle system I had it in mind that different weapons would convey different bonuses based on not only the material, but the weapon itself. So, a glass longsword would have a higher chance of punching through armor than a glass axe, but the axe would have a higher damage bonus. I can see how that could be too complicated, so if you guys don't want it I understand completely, but I do feel it would add some diversity to weapon types.

GLIPP wrote:

Saint Jiub wrote:We could use the same thing for combat, even.
Long Blade (50) + Glass (25) + Balanced (10) - Chitin Armor (25) + Agility bonus (6) + Chitin Shield (15)
85 - 46
39% chance to connect with your sword.

I like the basic core mechanic we have worked out, as it can apply to, well, anything, which is good. But the combat system in my opinion needs a bit of work.

The first problem I see is Agility bonus (6). If I'm correct in assuming that comes from an agility stat of 60, then the bonus is almost completely insubstantial in comparison with how high the ability is.

Secondly, I don't like the way armor/unarmored skills are handled. They don't seem to have any reward except for every 25 points in them, which is against the spirit of the game in my opinion. Every skill point you got meant something. I recommend that the armor themselves be the multiplier, and the fixed value be the armor skill.

And lastly, while this isn't a problem per se, when I suggested the battle system I had it in mind that different weapons would convey different bonuses based on not only the material, but the weapon itself. So, a glass longsword would have a higher chance of punching through armor than a glass axe, but the axe would have a higher damage bonus. I can see how that could be too complicated, so if you guys don't want it I understand completely, but I do feel it would add some diversity to weapon types.

The way armor works, as I understand it, is that you have your skill level. Different levels of armor work to a different amount of that skill level. So say you have 30 in heavy armor. That subtracts from the enemies roll as a modifier. However, if you only have something crummy like, say iron armor, you can't use the heavy armor to it's full effect. So you would only be able to use 10 of that heavy armor because of the crummy armor you are using.

That is how it was laid out in the very first thread on /tg/, but we could always change it if it doesn't work.

I figure you could use the armorer system to increase the amount an armor works, so after some time and materials invested, you could get that iron armor up to 15% instead of 10. Conversly, as the armor gets damaged after combat, it's 10% could drop down lower, eventually reaching 0%.
I figure that the improved armor at 15% would serve as a new maximum, so you wouldn't have to invest anything more than normal repairs to get it back up to 15% after it gets worn down. Or not, we'll see when we get around to that.

I know the agi bonus seems inconsequential, but that's a bonus in addition to the armor bonus, which I assumed was deflection and dodging. It's like, no matter how bulky your armor, a nimble enough fighter can make use of twisting his body, pivots, deflections, etc. to squeeze a little more defense out of his stance, even if he's playing a game of Punch the Brick Wall. So Chitin's defense is 25, which is the mobility of a warrior in chitin and the chance a blow will glance harmlessly. The AGI bonus is just a tiny extra nudge. If you like, we can have attacker and defender each add their AGI bonus, giving just a tiny advantage to the nimbler of the two.

Rainbay wrote:
The way armor works, as I understand it, is that you have your skill level. Different levels of armor work to a different amount of that skill level. So say you have 30 in heavy armor. That subtracts from the enemies roll as a modifier. However, if you only have something crummy like, say iron armor, you can't use the heavy armor to it's full effect. So you would only be able to use 10 of that heavy armor because of the crummy armor you are using.

That is how it was laid out in the very first thread on /tg/, but we could always change it if it doesn't work.

I figure you could use the armorer system to increase the amount an armor works, so after some time and materials invested, you could get that iron armor up to 15% instead of 10. Conversly, as the armor gets damaged after combat, it's 10% could drop down lower, eventually reaching 0%.
I figure that the improved armor at 15% would serve as a new maximum, so you wouldn't have to invest anything more than normal repairs to get it back up to 15% after it gets worn down. Or not, we'll see when we get around to that.

I don't like that system either, as it's also not true to the game. A master will always be able to do better than an apprentice given the same equipment, and the game represented that well.

I didn't come up with it. Perhaps we should just have the armor give a bonus then, rather than limit. So that iron armor gives a bonus of 10%. Truer to the game, and makes more sense.

Saint Jiub wrote:I know the agi bonus seems inconsequential, but that's a bonus in addition to the armor bonus, which I assumed was deflection and dodging. It's like, no matter how bulky your armor, a nimble enough fighter can make use of twisting his body, pivots, deflections, etc. to squeeze a little more defense out of his stance, even if he's playing a game of Punch the Brick Wall. So Chitin's defense is 25, which is the mobility of a warrior in chitin and the chance a blow will glance harmlessly. The AGI bonus is just a tiny extra nudge. If you like, we can have attacker and defender each add their AGI bonus, giving just a tiny advantage to the nimbler of the two.

Nimbleness is already factored in, in a way. Light armor and unarmored are based off agility and deflecting blows, while medium and heavy armor have required movements to absorb as much damage as possible, hence the skill involved. Adding in agility seems redundant.

And there's still the matter of working out armor skill and the armor modifiers.

No, I like the idea of adding your agility and subtracting theirs. That way involves a little more math, but makes sense. It is similar to how it worked in the game as well. So if you're more agile you get a bonus, but if they are more agile, you get negatives.

Maybe that's something we can use Attribute Bonuses for. Opposed checks! Per bonuses to social rolls, agi bonuses to combat rolls, WP bonuses to magical conflict (such as dispelling a spell or magical wrestling), Int bonuses to battles of wits, etc.

Saint Jiub wrote:Maybe that's something we can use Attribute Bonuses for. Opposed checks! Per bonuses to social rolls, agi bonuses to combat rolls, WP bonuses to magical conflict (such as dispelling a spell or magical wrestling), Int bonuses to battles of wits, etc.

Sounds wonderful. I don't see why talking to people is a battle of personality, but perhaps I'm just not passive aggressive enough.
Of course, since this would be on skill style checks, we could just have the battle of personality only come into effect when you are using steetwise, etiquette, or mercantile for something.

Rainbay wrote:

Saint Jiub wrote:Maybe that's something we can use Attribute Bonuses for. Opposed checks! Per bonuses to social rolls, agi bonuses to combat rolls, WP bonuses to magical conflict (such as dispelling a spell or magical wrestling), Int bonuses to battles of wits, etc.

Sounds wonderful. I don't see why talking to people is a battle of personality, but perhaps I'm just not passive aggressive enough.
Of course, since this would be on skill style checks, we could just have the battle of personality only come into effect when you are using steetwise, etiquette, or mercantile for something.

Well, negotiations are a matter of who can leverage their assets as much as they are the assets themselves. A skilled interrogator knows what to say, but a stubborn man will keep his mouth shut out of spite, if nothing else. And if it's two orators vying for the favor of a crowd (like politicians) personality is absolutely everything!

All the more reason that when we test this, I am considering playing a Personality and "Speechcraft" BEAST, using boosts to get them all way over 100. Then just tell outright lies that aren't even possible at every chance I can get all the time.

Walk into some random shop. Start shouting at the shopkeeper for what he's doing in MY shop behind MY counter. He says that this is HIS store, I lie out my ass and use my godly social skills to convince him I AM HIM and then call the guards on him.

I think the key in keeping this both as playable and close to the source as possible is to make it so that, in any given situation, the character's skill is the single largest factor in the roll. So your amor skill would make more of a difference that what armor you were wearing.

Maybe to accomplish this, we make armor work like lockpicks - some armors are apprentice tier, some journey man, etc - and tier grants the same bonus to defense. Different armors within a tier might have different properties, or be modified by different skills, but this lets us keep skill as the main driver in any roll.

Rainbay wrote:All the more reason that when we test this, I am considering playing a Personality and "Speechcraft" BEAST, using boosts to get them all way over 100. Then just tell outright lies that aren't even possible at every chance I can get all the time.

Walk into some random shop. Start shouting at the shopkeeper for what he's doing in MY shop behind MY counter. He says that this is HIS store, I lie out my ass and use my godly social skills to convince him I AM HIM and then call the guards on him.

I think you'd take some really harsh penalties for that. In fact, if you went in raving like a lunatic, it would be no trouble at all to call the guards and take a look at the charter to see who owns the building. If, however, you forged yourself an ancestral writ of ownership (presumably using Streetwise) and then explained to the storekeeper that you'd gladly allow him to continue his business for the small price of, say, 2% of his take...
and then do that for every store in Balmora...

Saint Jiub wrote:

Rainbay wrote:All the more reason that when we test this, I am considering playing a Personality and "Speechcraft" BEAST, using boosts to get them all way over 100. Then just tell outright lies that aren't even possible at every chance I can get all the time.

Walk into some random shop. Start shouting at the shopkeeper for what he's doing in MY shop behind MY counter. He says that this is HIS store, I lie out my ass and use my godly social skills to convince him I AM HIM and then call the guards on him.

I think you'd take some really harsh penalties for that. In fact, if you went in raving like a lunatic, it would be no trouble at all to call the guards and take a look at the charter to see who owns the building. If, however, you forged yourself an ancestral writ of ownership (presumably using Streetwise) and then explained to the storekeeper that you'd gladly allow him to continue his business for the small price of, say, 2% of his take...
and then do that for every store in Balmora...

It might be a good time to point out the guards I would call in would probably other party members disguised as guards. And even if they weren't, I planned to abuse boosts from enchantment, birthsigns, spells and potions so much that I would have at least 300 personality, if not much more than that even. With that much, along with say... 150 in streetwise and etiquette through more boosts, I could easily crush any roll made. I wouldn't just be convincing him and the guards that I owned the store, no, that would be child's play. I am convincing him and the guards that I AM him, while this guy is an imposter. And let's such an outright insane lie takes a negative of 200%. The math would be along the lines of:

(Personality (350)+streetwise(150)) - (his Willpower(50)+ his personality(50)+stupid lie(250))
so 500-350=150

I'd have to roll under 150 to convince him everything he knows is a lie, that I am the real whatever his name is. I think I can pretty easily roll under 150.

Just forging the deed is devious, but no fun. I prefer a challenge.

No offense, that's exactly the kind of abuse that I would like to prevent with our system. If our players can create a pun-pun of speechcraft, we've failed at our job.

Simple fix: Hardcap abilities and skills at 100. There is an end to the road, and not even magic can push the body and mind beyond what is possible. Only divine rank can do that.

GLIPP wrote:Simple fix: Hardcap abilities and skills at 100. There is an end to the road, and not even magic can push the body and mind beyond what is possible. Only divine rank can do that.

I dunno about 100. Maybe 150, since the whole point of magic and the like is to do exactly that - go beyond what people should be able to do. But even at 150 each, pulling off a bluff that suddenly your life is my life and you're a criminal for living in it would probably require you to magically addle the target as well. And who knows what happens when you start tossing that many spells around. Someone's bound to notice...

I\'d prefer a hardcap of 200. Oblivion had bonuses for most things stop working after 100, and I hated it. It is reasonable for MAGIC to be able to boost the body beyond normal, but only to a point. And I was just joking around mostly with the speechcraft monster. IT\'s our job to find flaws in our system then fix them, afterall.

Still... I\'ll miss that personality fellow idea I had... or as I called it, the wordomancer.

EDIT: 150 works too, I suppose. This is 50 points higher than the normal maximum, pretty impressive. I\'d still prefer 200, even though that risks abuse. It is easy to reach a 150 cap with little effort. For instance, become a quarne vampire and get a +40 bonus to strength. Wear the glove of rangulf that boosts strength, and you\'d have 160.

Good point, but I do like 150 better than 200.

Yes, better safe than sorry. 150 it is I suppose, unless someone has anything to say?

Just remember, this is all subject to playtest. In the end, we may find 200 is a better hardcap. But I think our ultimate judge of whether the system is broken will be when we submit the final product to /tg/. If anybody can munchkin a system into Oblivion (lol, see what I did thar?) it's fa/tg/uy asspies.